December 22, 2014, 09:33:44 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Axilrod

Pages: 1 ... 76 77 [78] 79 80 ... 92
1156
Actually I just noticed it says 16-35mm f/2.8L II in your sig, so you need an 82mm. 
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/676826-REG/Genus_GL_GNDF_82_82mm_ND_Neutral_Density.html

1157
I recently acquired the 16-35mm L IS USM Canon lens.  Prior I had been buying highly rated / reviewed 72mm filters.  I've used several of the filter review sites prior to acquiring any UV or Polarizer filters (especially lenstip.com which was very thorough) however I am curious if anyone has (1) any experience with Zykkor or other ND faders from ND2 to ND400 or do you believe carrying individual ND filters is a better way to go?  I've been told the Zykkor's use Hoya glass.  I do have the Hoya ND400 HMC 72mm and the Hoya HMC ND 8 and am fond of these two but I am also keeping in mind and trying to minimize the carrying load if it makes sense.  Thanks in advance.

There is no such thing as a 16-35mm IS.  There is a 16-35mm f/2.8L (version 1) that takes 77mm filters, and a 16-35mm f/2.8L II that takes 82mm filters.  So I'm confused.

As for Fader ND filters, I have a Genus 72mm that I use with all my large aperture primes, it's nice to have the adjustability and being able to shoot wide open in broad daylight.


1158
Lenses / Re: How do you pay for your lenses?
« on: January 28, 2012, 01:10:43 PM »
Owning people playing poker, paid cash for every lens in my sig +
2 different 24-70L
1 other copy of 35L
100 MacroL
70-200 f/2.8IS
50 1.4, 85 1.8

And up until November 2010 all I had was a T2i/18-55. 

1159
EOS Bodies / Re: Poll - What is the Mystery Canon Body?
« on: January 28, 2012, 01:07:44 PM »

However, that's not the case with the mystery cam--the LCD is clearly NOT a 3x2 ratio but is 16x9 or so, and this obviously is a direct video feature that is at odds with a stills dedicated camera.

I don't know about that...to me, it just looks like a 3x2 screen which due to the angle at which the shot was taken looks wider than it is. I call optical illusion :-)

If this really is the 5DX, then the styling is modeled heavily after the current 7D (it's almost identical), and somehow I don't see them doing that with 5DX. I'll place my bet on 7DX :-)

There were multiple angles, not just one, and it's obvious its noticeably wider than a 5DII or 7D screen.
http://photorumors.com/2012/01/23/canon-5d-mark-iii-200-400mm-600mm-prototypes-spotted-in-kenya/

The viewfinder actually looks like it's wider than the 5DII/7D also, similar aspect ratio to the LCD.

1160
EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« on: January 28, 2012, 01:04:06 PM »
61pt AF

CR-Guy: Do you believe any S___ in your inbox?


This will NEVER HAPPEN!

I do think 61-pt is somewhat of a stretch, but you never know.  He's been right many times before and has reliable sources and wouldn't CR2 this if he didn't think it was probable.  Everyone is saying these specs are unbelievable based on a price of $2500 (which I highly doubt will be the final cost).  But if the camera is $3000-$3500 it seems like it could be possible. 

1161
Lenses / Re: What about a new 50/1.4 ??
« on: January 27, 2012, 04:40:01 PM »
If someone wants an upgrade from the current 50mm f/1.4 but doesn't want to lay down the dough for a 50L, I think the Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 is a fantastic lens. 

You can find them for around $600 used and they are razor sharp, color rendition/contrast are absolutely beautiful.  That is if you can live without Autofocus.

1162
EOS Bodies / Re: Poll - What is the Mystery Canon Body?
« on: January 27, 2012, 04:34:36 PM »

However, that's not the case with the mystery cam--the LCD is clearly NOT a 3x2 ratio but is 16x9 or so, and this obviously is a direct video feature that is at odds with a stills dedicated camera.

I don't know about that...to me, it just looks like a 3x2 screen which due to the angle at which the shot was taken looks wider than it is. I call optical illusion :-)

If this really is the 5DX, then the styling is modeled heavily after the current 7D (it's almost identical), and somehow I don't see them doing that with 5DX. I'll place my bet on 7DX :-)

There were multiple angles, not just one, and it's obvious its noticeably wider than a 5DII or 7D screen.
http://photorumors.com/2012/01/23/canon-5d-mark-iii-200-400mm-600mm-prototypes-spotted-in-kenya/

1163
Canon General / Re: Patent: Canon RAW Video
« on: January 27, 2012, 12:56:00 PM »
Yes!  I knew they'd figure something out.  Hope this is what's coming to the CDSLR. 

I really think aside from really high resolution the CDSLR will require a lot of accessories to do everything a C300 does, hopefully the price will reflect this. 

1164
Lenses / Re: I can't believe I bought a $2000 prime.
« on: January 26, 2012, 04:38:29 PM »
Hi, I know the feeling very well. In November I bought the TS-E 24L II, my most expensive lens so far. For months I wanted this lens but a new one costs about 1900€ (~$2500). To get a used one is almost impossible. Then I found an ebay auction one night and did not think twice. I got it used for 1640€ (~ $2000). It came from a small camera shop which opened the box maybe once or twice. The lense arrived in a perfect condition and I couldn't tell it from a new one. After the first shots I'm really in love with the lense and never gonna sell it again. The lens is worth every cent and will probably last a lifetime. And I can sell it for them price like I bought it...

When I bought my first DSLR in a kit (450D + EF-S 18-55 + EF-S 55-250) I was much more sure to spend the 800€, although with an income of a student it was a lot of money for me. I never did regret more a purchase than this one. The 450D is great but both lenses were a totally waste of money... Since this purchase I bought all new lenses and even my 5D Mark II as used. It saved me a lot of money (20-40% depending how lucky I was) and the loss is not that great if I regret a purchase once again.

For anyone else looking for a good used deal on the TS-E 24mm, Lensrentals sells them quite often, they actually have one now : http://www.lensrentals.com/buy/canon-ts-e-24mm-f3.5l-ii-serial-number-12996

1165
interesting... fans of House will know an episode was used to film it too....

I didn't know episodes were used to film house! ;)  They used it for a finale because of its ability to shoot in tight spaces (there was some sort of disaster in the episode).  But I'm pretty sure they continued using it and still do.

1166
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mk2 ..... APS-H
« on: January 26, 2012, 10:24:24 AM »
Don't talk to me like I'm a F______ idiot that misunderstood your post, you said this:
"the 70D could have better AF, better body construction etc. and the 7D MK2 would still have some edge.

he said BETTER yes.
but he said not BETTER then WHAT, so BETTER watch your tone.

Listen Mr. Internet police, he said the 70D could have better AF, better body construction etc. and the 7DII would still have an edge.  How does that not make it sound like he is comparing the two?

1167
Lenses / Re: What lenses should I get for my 7d? (16 year old)
« on: January 26, 2012, 10:16:57 AM »

It doesn't matter what he needs or wants, as cheap as his friend is supposedly selling those lenses it would be foolish not to buy all of them....if not for use, for resale, at which point he would have a much larger budget to get what he actually needs.

Well from an economic standpoint, sure.

Does it matter how the lenses were acquired by the friend from a legal standpoint? [since we are unconvinced of his honesty...]

Nope, his friend told him it's someone that works at Canon, must be someone that works at Canon.  Come on people I feel like we are calling a hooker an "escort" right now.  Everyone is carrying on pretending like they don't think this kid is completely full of S___, or that his buddy isn't completely full of S___. 

I honestly laughed when I saw someone still trying to recommend lenses on the 3rd page.  It's like "oh I'll avoid all this talk of stolen, broken lenses and just recommend the 85  1.8!"

I really think the kid is just making all of this up to create small talk honestly, some people are odd like that.  I think he figured "hey stuff that's used usually sells for half price, so I'll say my buddy is selling these lenses for half price. durrr hurrrrr hurrrrrrrrr"
Followed by "oh S___ they almost the same price as new, RUUNNNNNN!"

Hence, the lack of posts after people pointing that out.

1168
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mk2 ..... APS-H
« on: January 26, 2012, 10:09:40 AM »
Edit: Misunderstanding, carry on.

1169
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mk2 ..... APS-H
« on: January 26, 2012, 10:06:15 AM »
im just thinking here....

canon said it will not abandon the APS-H sensor format.

would it make sense for canon to put an APS-H sensor in the 7D MK2?

why or why not? what do you think?

i think what speaks against it is EF-S lenses....
but on the other side it would be a nice seperation from the XXD models.

the 70D could have better AF, better body construction etc. and the 7D MK2 would still have some edge.

This makes no sense, the 7D has one of the best autofocus systems out of any Canon camera right now, and the 60D AF is definitely inferior.  You're saying that in one generation that the 7D will improve the AF barely any and the 70D will somehow catch up and pass the 7D?

And if the 70D had better AF and better body construction, how would a 7DII with APS-C have an edge over it?  If you're a wildlife/sports photographer it's not an edge at all. 


The 7D has a mighty edge precisely because of it's crop. 1.6 is a lot more reach than 1!

I meant APS-H

1170
EOS Bodies / Re: The Canon 5D line and AF...
« on: January 26, 2012, 10:03:53 AM »
So with all the rumors about the Canon 5D III, there is obviously a lot of speculation about what features it may have. I've noticed that when people post their ideas about what they expect in a 5D III body, they inevitably contain some form of "7D AF". I'm curious where that idea comes from. Personally, I see the 5D III positioned very differently, and as far as I can tell very appropriately, in the canon lineup compared to the 1D X and the 7D lines. I see the 5D line as a camera primarily (but not solely) tuned for landscape, weddings, studio, amateur astrophotography (know or know of a fair amount of people who use the 5D II for this), extreme macro (100mm f/2.8 and MP-E 65mm stuff...where low noise large pixel really helps gather the necessary light at necessarily tight apertures) and DSLR video work. In pretty much all of those cases, and many of the more fringe use cases, there does not appear to be a strong need for high FPS and super-awesome AF. When it comes to landscape, astrophotography, and video/cinematography, and macro autofocus is pretty much useless in any respect...manual focus really reigns king. The need for AF for other kinds of photography that you might use a 5D III for such as weddings, generally don't involve the kind of crazy high speed action you might find in motorcross; ski and snowboarding; baseball, football, soccer, etc; even wildlife and bird photography.

Granted, the bottom-rung AF system the 5D II has is definitely not worthy of a professional-grade camera, and NEEDS to be replaced...however is a top of the line AF system designed for AI Servo type continuous tracking of high speed subjects really necessary? Am I missing something in thinking that the 5D III needs an improvement to its AF system, but nothing on the level of the 7D? Am I not fully realizing the primary ways that the 5D II is used that would warrant a high speed AF system, and why a 1D X wouldn't be used instead? I'm mostly just curious, but also wondering if Canon has positioned the 5D line incorrectly according to the people who are interested in buying one and expect a top notch AF system like the 7D's.

Hmmm, you don't have a 5DII in your sig, interesting that you bash and marginalize the camera's AF system.  Is that all based on stuff you've read from other people?  It's going on 4 years old, so sure it could be better, but it really isn't that bad.  I think more of the problem is user error, using the wrong setting or combination of settings. 

Think about how many people bought 5DIIs that had barely any photography experience (I was one of them, although I had a T2i for 8 months beforehand).  Now think about how easily those people may have overlooked something and how quick they may have been to judge.  Plus you have a bunch of fools on the internet telling them "oh it sucks," so they go take 3 pictures and 1 is out of focus and they figure "oh well the internet said it sucks so it must suck, couldn't be me."

That's pretty much what happen to me, I played around with it, remembered that everyone had said that it sucked, and figured that it must have.  But then months later I played around with the settings some more and realized that it really wasn't bad at all (and this was shooting my dogs running full speed).

And I'm sure tons of those people went out and tried to shoot sports and other fast-moving stuff, and that's setting yourself up for disappointment.  The 5D was never marketed as a fast sports camera, not at all.  Sure the 5D may not be the best, but if you're doing studio work it does absolutely fine. 

Neuro is right, people take the best aspects of multiple cameras and smash them all together and hope that they get one cure-all camera, but it just doesn't work like that.  All of them are fantasizing and they all want a single, dirt cheap camera to come out that does everything that they personally want it to do.

Pages: 1 ... 76 77 [78] 79 80 ... 92